Atristain has spent twelve years in Spanish prisons and was released last February following a favourable judgment by the European Court of Human Rights, also known as the Strasbourg Court. Basically, the sentence said that the Civil Guard did not explain why she was incommunicado during the detention and, consequently, did not allow her to choose her trusted lawyer.

The Atristain declaration was key to the sanction imposed, and according to the case of Strasbourg, in doing so the fundamental rights of the detainee were violated, and the matter should be reviewed. After his release, Atristain asked the Supreme Court to reconsider the case that brought him to prison, but the Supreme Prosecutor has asked the court not to confirm the case and the court has accepted his thesis.

Debates of the European Parliament

The present Supreme Court’s resolution is not readily understood, given that Strasbourg has had two resolutions on this issue. The first took place in January, then was appealed by the Spanish Lawyer and was rejected by another court in Strasbourg.

Now the Supreme Court says that the Strasbourg judgment does not call into question Spanish legislation or the incommunication of detainees under the charge of terrorism, provided that it is duly justified. And that is what the Atristain defence and the Strasbourg case say, which was not properly justified.

But in addition, and following the arguments of the Supreme Prosecutor, the Supreme has said that, in addition to Atristain’s statements, many other tests to punish her were, among others, the statements of other defendants, the statements of other third parties, the Civil Guard’s testimonies, the conclusions of the explorations made and the expert evidence.

The doctrine is in force

It is strange that the Supreme Court pronounced, on the one hand for the release of Atristain after the resolution and, on the other hand, because the National Court of Spain has already used the case-law relating to this case. Consequently, he has acquitted Gorka Palacios and Juan Carlos Iglesias in recent months.

There was already a great deal of confusion on the subject, because he did not imagine how the Atristain case would affect hundreds of other sentences, as his sentences were also based on incommunication and the declaration subjected to torture. Now the matter is getting even more complicated.